Kohlberg's Theory (AQA A-Level Psychology): Revision Notes
Kohlberg's Theory
Level of moral reasoning
Moral reasoning refers to a cognitive explanation suggesting that individuals with lower moral development are more likely to commit crimes because they do not fully consider how their actions affect society. This theory builds on developmental psychology research showing that moral reasoning becomes more sophisticated as people mature.
Kohlberg's theory is grounded in developmental psychology, which studies how people's thinking patterns and moral understanding evolve throughout their lifetime. This foundation helps explain why some individuals remain at lower levels of moral development.
Kohlberg developed a stage theory of moral development where some individuals do not progress beyond certain levels, making them more prone to criminal behaviour. He identified three main levels of moral development, each containing two stages, creating six stages in total.
Kohlberg's stages of moral reasoning
Pre-conventional morality
At this basic level, moral reasoning focuses on avoiding punishment and gaining rewards.
Punishment stage: The most elementary reasoning where behaviour is guided by the simple question "Will I be punished?" If punishment seems unlikely or unclear, crime becomes more probable.
Worked Example: Punishment Stage Reasoning
A person considers shoplifting from a busy store. Their thought process:
- "Will anyone see me?"
- "Are there security cameras?"
- "What are the chances of getting caught?"
If they perceive low risk of punishment, they're more likely to proceed with the theft.
Reward stage: Decisions are based entirely on personal gain. If the potential benefits from criminal behaviour outweigh the costs, the person is more likely to offend.
Conventional morality
This level considers social expectations and the opinions of others.
Good-boy/good-girl stage: Moral reasoning focuses on what others would think. If a person's social circle consists of criminals, they are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour to gain approval.
Law-and-order stage: Behaviour is guided by legal considerations. Someone at this stage asks "Is this illegal?" and would be less likely to commit crimes due to respect for authority and rules.
The law-and-order stage represents a crucial turning point where individuals begin to consider broader social structures and rules, not just personal consequences or peer approval.
Post-conventional morality
The highest level involves personal moral principles that may sometimes conflict with laws.
Social contract stage: People understand that laws exist for society's benefit but recognise there may be circumstances where breaking them could be justified if the law seems inappropriate.
Ethical principle stage: Individuals develop their own moral code based on universal principles. They might commit crimes if they believe the law is fundamentally unjust.
Research support
Hollin et al. (2002) found that offenders demonstrated less mature moral reasoning compared to non-offenders, directly supporting Kohlberg's theory.
Palmer (2003) examined the relationship between moral development and offending behaviour, discovering that specific moral values are associated with criminal activity. This research suggests that intervention programmes should focus on developing offenders' moral reasoning abilities.
Palmer's research was particularly significant because it not only confirmed the link between moral reasoning and crime but also provided practical guidance for rehabilitation programmes.
Ashkar and Kenny (2007) compared moral reasoning levels between juvenile sex offenders and non-sex offenders. Both groups showed pre-conventional moral reasoning when discussing situations similar to their crimes, but demonstrated higher conventional reasoning for unrelated situations. This indicates that moral reasoning varies by context and that offenders may have situation-specific deficits in moral development.
Evaluation
Strengths
-
Research support: Multiple studies have found that offenders typically show lower levels of moral reasoning than non-offenders, providing empirical backing for the theory.
-
Practical applications: The theory suggests clear intervention strategies. If criminal behaviour stems from poor moral reasoning, rehabilitation programmes can focus on developing these cognitive skills.
-
Individual differences: Moral reasoning can explain why some people commit crimes while others in similar circumstances do not, accounting for personal variation in criminal behaviour.
Weaknesses
- Gender bias: Kohlberg's original research used only male participants, making the theory potentially gender-biased. Gilligan (1982) argued that women's moral development differs from men's, focusing more on care and relationships rather than justice and fairness. Given different crime rates between genders, this limitation may affect the theory's applicability.
The gender bias criticism is particularly significant because it questions whether the theory can accurately explain criminal behaviour across all populations, not just male offenders.
-
Low predictive reliability: The theory was developed using moral dilemmas (hypothetical scenarios), which may not accurately predict real-world behaviour. How someone responds to an imaginary situation may differ greatly from their actual behaviour in similar circumstances.
-
Situational variation: Research shows that moral reasoning can vary depending on the specific situation, suggesting that moral development may not be as stable or consistent as Kohlberg proposed.
-
Cultural bias: The theory was developed within a specific cultural context and may not apply universally across different societies with varying moral frameworks.
Key Points to Remember:
- Kohlberg identified three levels of moral reasoning: pre-conventional, conventional, and post-conventional, each with two stages
- People stuck at lower levels are more likely to engage in criminal behaviour because they don't consider the broader impact of their actions
- Research evidence supports the link between poor moral reasoning and offending behaviour
- The theory has practical applications for rehabilitation programmes focusing on moral development
- Major criticisms include gender bias, low predictive reliability, and cultural limitations